We Fucked Up

over 7 years ago from Andrew Wilkinson, Publisher of Designer News

  • Sean HealeySean Healey, over 7 years ago

    Are all of you people serious with this outlandish backlash? As the owner of an apparel company I'd like to point out something: TO MY UNDERSTANDING, the shirts are printed on the American Apparel 2001 Crewneck T-Shirt. This particular shirt is known to boast a tapered European fit, meaning the sleeves are shorter than, say, a basic Hanes tee you might find at the craft store. They are also tighter around the bicep. The torso of the tee tapers down from the armpits to the waist to contour, somewhat, to the body. This creates what is known as a "unisex" cut. It is truly unisex because it's not super-boxy like basic men's tees, but it doesn't have the extra-short sleeves of women's tees.

    I myself have printed on this exact shirt in years prior in an attempt to afford a broad range of sizes for both genders. If I hadn't done that, I'd have to order less varied sizes, and I'm a fat dude that can barely fit in an XL, so that wasn't something that would work for me of the brand. Would you rather discriminate against fat people instead of female people because that scenario doesn't directly pertain to you? I hope not.

    Female friends of mine have not only worn these shirts confidently, but actually MODELED in them and garnered more attention to the brand than anything else. So save your complaints for a worthy cause, because DN is a beautiful place that hasn't wronged any of us, ESPECIALLY in this situation over a stupid unisex vs. men's t-shirt debacle. They not even a shirt company. And you're not an activist if you're berating others in the comment section of a forum; you're more like a raincloud. Go away.

    20 points